ArticlePDF Available

The Estonian E-Voting Laws Discourse: Paradigmatic Benchmarking for Central and Eastern Europe



This paper therefore sets out to, first, follow the process -- interesting as such, it has only been documented and analyzed once before (Drechsler and Madise 2002), and the current piece presents a University of Tartu, Estonia
The Estonian E-Voting Laws Discourse:
Paradigmatic Benchmarking
for Central and Eastern Europe
Wolfgang Drechsler
1. Introduction
The Republic of Estonia has been, and still is, widely credited to be a pioneer in e-governance and
especially e-democracy, with headlines such as “Estonia: 10 Years from Communism to Advanced e-
It had frequently been expected, too, that Estonia would be the leading country for e-
voting, introducing it already for the national elections this year.
However, in the very last changes of
the respective laws, the Estonian Parliament voted for e-voting, not for the immediate future, but only
with a delay of implementation until the year 2005. Still, the Estonian is the first case world-wide of a
country that has actually passed overall e-voting laws.
This primacy, by virtue of some variant of ‘the normative power of the factual’, therefore sets the scene
for all e-voting laws considered anywhere – but especially so for the countries of Central and Eastern
Europe (CEE), if we believe at all in any form of regional characteristics and therefore similarity and
comparability. The Estonian e-voting laws, but also the discourse through which they emerged,
therefore serve as a paradigmatic benchmark – broadly understood here as a benchmark both in a
positive as well as possibly in a negative sense as well – for all e-voting law discourses to occur in all
the other CEE countries.
This paper therefore sets out to, first, follow the process – interesting as such, it has only been
documented and analyzed once before (Drechsler and Madise 2002), and the current piece presents a
University of Tartu, Estonia.
In the article at http://www.e-
Statements, state of legislation, and web-links of this paper are generally valid as of 15 February 2003.
I am grateful to Rainer Kattel and Ülle Madise for comments on this paper.
See, e.g.,;
“You can’t stop progress though and it looks
as though Estonia will be the world’s first nation to provide e-voting at its next General Election in
Wolfgang Drechsler
very short but also updated account of that story.
The question of discourse will then be addressed,
and an interpretation offered. As the benchmarking will indeed be seen to entail an inverted, i.e.
negative, quality as well – the dog that did not bark during the night –, a final segment will also briefly
discuss these aspects.
2. E-voting in Estonia: a narrative
The plan to introduce e-voting in Estonia was first publicly announced by the Minister of Justice, Märt
Rask, a member of Reformierakond (“Reform Party”,
), the neo-liberal (indeed, market-
radical) ‘transition winners’’ party, at the beginning of 2001. Given the general fashion of e-related
matters, which is particularly strong in Estonia, and swift developments in such fields as e-banking (see
), paperless government (see
), and broadcasting of
parliamentary sessions (see
), this was a likely step to take.
Estonian leadership in e-related fields was and is also seen as a key part of ‘branding Estonia’ and
overall of making Estonia better known globally.
The idea of e-voting was thus strongly promoted by Prime Minister Laar, who in the Parliamentary
question time of 17 January 2001 proposed the idea of testing e-voting during the same year and to
decide then whether to introduce it already for the 2002 local elections. (See
To get an overview of the possible methods and risks of remote Internet voting, the Ministry of Justice
ordered an analysis from two scholars in the field. (Lipmaa and Mürk 2001) The report by the Internet
Policy Institute published in the USA at the same time
was also used as a basis of study. The
commissioned analysis recommended to prepare some experiments or pilot-projects first and not to
introduce e-voting before 2007, because an earlier date would be technically, and therefore also
socially, too risky. (1, 28-30) In the fall of 2001, another analysis was ordered from a mathematician
by the Estonian Ministry of Transport and Communication, which was to focus especially on technical
questions and costs. In this analysis, concrete recommendations concerning the voting process were
given and a provisional budget of e-elections was drawn up. (IT Meedia 2001)
I would like to thank the co-author of that essay, Ülle Madise, without whom the current paper
would not exist, for her very kind permission to use materials of the earlier piece, unmarked, in the
current one. Drechsler and Madise 2002 also contains extensive references and technical as well as
legislative details.
See generally, e.g., the Estonian Agenda 21,
The Estonian e-voting law discourse
Taking into account the purpose to introduce public remote Internet voting and some of the
recommendations given by the experts – but not the one by its own experts as regarded postponement
until 2007 –, e-voting provisions were drafted by the Ministry of Justice and sent to the parliament.
There, they were not discussed generally, but as part of four different new election laws: The Local
Communities Election Act, the Referendum Act, the European Parliament Election Act, and the
Riigikogu Election Act. The discussions in the Riigikogu as far as the e-voting feature was concerned
were more or less seamless as well and not really closely connected with what Act it actually was.
However, since local elections were scheduled for 2002, it was this Act that drew more attention than
the other, followed by the Referendum Act because of its implications for European Union accession.
When discussing specific features (which in the end were the same for all four Acts), I will therefore
refer below to the development of the provisions of the Local Communities Election Act.
As was to be expected, already in the very first stage of developing the e-voting idea, the old and new
government coalition parties – until January 2002, Right-Libertarian-Moderate, from then Libertarian-
Populist – were principally in favour of e-voting, the opposition parties Rahvaliit and Ühendatud
Rahvapartei factions against. In order to understand this, it is important to briefly sketch out the
Estonian party structure. The first government coalition mentioned here (‘Laar II’ – the government
headed, for the second time, by Mart Laar) included, in addition to the already-mentioned ‘libertarian’
the ‘right’ Isamaaliit (“Pro Patria Union”,
; cf. also
Laar 2002), a generally nationalist but for the most part also market-radical party that in a
slightly different composition formed the government right after the regaining of
independence; and
the ‘moderate’ Mõõdukad (“Moderates”,
), who by their self-definition are
Social Democrats but by ‘Western’ standards quite to the right of that field.
The second government coalition (‘Kallas’ – headed by Siim Kallas) includes Reformierakond and
the ‘populist’ Keskerakond (“Centre Party”,
), the main ‘transition
losers’’ party, with a semi-charismatic leader, Edgar Savisaar, currently the Mayor of Tallinn,
but without a genuine post-Socialist ideology.
The two opposition parties mentioned are
Eestimaa Rahvaliit (“Estonian Peoples Union”,
), a party similar to Keskerakond
but with a strong and explicit rural orientation; and
Eestimaa Ühendatud Rahvapartei (“Estonian United Peoples Party”,
), the
most clearly post-Socialist party with a special appeal for that part of the Russian-speaking
population of Estonia that is actually allowed to vote.
The initial draft of Local Communities Election Act can be found at
: Täiskogul menetletud eelnõu nr 747. Menetlusetapid. Algtekst.
Wolfgang Drechsler
The governing coalition Kallas does not command a majority in the Riigikogu – rather, only 47 of the
101 votes. The missing votes are usually delivered by the Rahvaliit (which is also the party of the
President), so that party cannot be ignored.
E-voting provisions were always supported in plenary session.
It should be noticed that pilot projects
were perhaps occasionally considered, as in the beginning by Laar himself, but they were never
seriously put on the agenda. In some sense, the entire draft and then law would be its own pilot project
– not a rare modus operandi in Estonia. In the end, as a form of compromise, in all laws or drafts,
was explicitly stated that e-voting should not be applied before the year 2005 (§ 74 (5) in the Local
Communities Election Act). This was apparently in deference to the Rahvaliit faction – as was
mentioned, the government commands at best a minority of 47 out of 101 votes, and their Rahvaliit
votes are therefore usually important (although not in this special case), which is why their opinion is
taken into consideration.
3. The discourse
3.1. Ministry
The discourse to be analyzed already starts on the Ministerial level. According to § 60 of the Estonian
Constitution, “Members of the Riigikogu shall be elected in free elections on the principle of
proportionality. Elections shall be general, uniform and direct. Voting shall be secret.” Since the
original drafting of the Constitution of 1992, these principles have not been the subject of juridical
discussion, so they are ill-defined. (See Annus 2001, 64-70) As to whether e-voting would influence
these principles, the Minister and Ministry based themselves on two basic decisions:
According to the descriptions given above, this means that the current governing coalition
consists of ‘transition winners’ and ‘transition losers’. However, in Estonia this is not necessarily a
contradiction, because Reformierakond indeed does promulgate an ideology appropriate for its
clientele, but Keskerakond does not; rather, it has hardly any ideology at all – it is, therefore, a classic
populist party. They are therefore not unlikely coalition partners at all. – Votes are scheduled for
March 2003, i.e. they fall between the deadline for this paper and the Bucharest conference, so there
might easily be a new coalition in place once this paper is discussed.
See the debate and voting results according to the minutes as cited below (FN 10). About the
voting process, see the Riigikogu Internal Rules Act,
The Local Communities Election Act was adopted by Parliament on 27 March 2002 and
entered into force on 6 May 2002. RT I 2002, 36, 220. The Referendum Act was adopted on 13 March
2002 and entered into force on 6 April 2002. RT I 2002, 30, 176. The Riigikogu Election Act was
adopted on 12 June 2002 and entered into force on 18 July 2002. RT I 2002, 57, 355. The European
Parliament Election Act was adopted by Parliament on 18 December 2002 and entered into force on 23
January 2003. RT I 2003, 4, 22.
The Estonian e-voting law discourse
1. To use a teleological approach to Constitutional interpretation, i.e. to say that Constitutional
problems should be understood through the problems the given principles were meant to
solve. As an example in the current case of e-voting, the principle of secrecy (raised most
strongly in Parliament later on) was said to protect an individual from any pressure or
influence against her or his free expression of the political preference – i.e., that it is a means,
not an end. This includes the threat that the state or a public official can check who voted for
whom. But it was said that, if privacy is guaranteed in the polling station and if all those who
have voted via the Internet have the right (which was proposed) to go to the polling station on
election day and replace their electronically recorded, transferred and counted vote by a new
paper-ballot (see § 55 of the initial draft of the Local Communities Election law), then the aim
of the principle of secrecy, the end, is actually achieved.
2. To start from the assumption that the State must ‘trust the people’ and not interfere if at all
possible in any of their decisions. The Reformierakond ideology informs this approach. As an
example in our context, the problem that e-voting would facilitate some families, friends or
colleagues voting together, i.e. practice collective voting, as well as the buying and selling of
votes, was said to hinge on the question of whether the State would have to protect an
individual only from other individuals or also from her- or himself. It was not seen that
collective voting could be a problem for the state as well, and not only for the individual.
3.2 Parliament
Parliamentary debate on e-voting was long and lively. In the plenary session, e-voting was discussed
within all readings of all four drafts.
We can draw up the following tables of discussion points of
problems of e-voting:
1. Equality of citizens in political life – “unfair” towards non-connected citizens / digital gap
2. Detriment to democracy (going to the polling station would be a valuable action by itself)
3. Unconstitutionality of e-voting (secrecy, generality, and uniformity)
4. Privacy and secrecy of voting not guaranteed
5. Security of electronic voting systems not sure
6. Proneness to fraud
7. Negative or absent experiences in other countries
8. The weakness of technical preparations
9. The problem of hackers
See the minutes at The draft of the Local Communities
Election was discussed on 14 June 2001, 23 January, 27 February, and 27 March 2002; the draft of the
Riigikogu Election Act on 14 June 2001, 30 January 2002, 27 March, 15 and 22 May 2002; the draft of
the Referendum Act on 19 September 2001, 30 January and 13. March 2002; the draft of the European
Parliament Election Act on 23 January 2002.
Wolfgang Drechsler
It may generally be noticed that a large majority of Members shared the Ministry’s attitude towards
teleological interpretation of the Constitution, as well as the assumption that
1. e-voting increases voter turnout; and that this
2. automatically has a positive effect on ‘Democracy’.
3.3. Public
There was hardly any accompanying discussion of e-voting in media or society (with the exception of a
few newspaper articles and simple and emotional anonymous comments to them in online-newspapers
and info-portals);
likewise, neither were there any significant public comments by social scientists or
lawyers. In January 2001, the editorial of the business daily Äripäev had been devoted to the idea of the
Minister of Justice to introduce e-voting in Estonia. (“Miks oodata aastani 2003” 2001) The editor
asked why Estonia should wait until 2003; rather, Internet voting should be introduced already for the
local elections of 2002. This had then been discussed. (See Äripäev Online, 5 January 2001,
4. Discussion
One can safely say that the e-voting initiative came from political elite, and that it was and is largely
detached from ‘the people’ whose participation it is supposed to increase. One could certainly
diagnose for Estonia an attitude towards the right to vote, and democratic decision-making in general,
that one might describe variously as pragmatic, relaxed, detached, or cynical. Anecdotally, as regards
e.g. possibilities of fraud, one could often hear people saying that, if they trusted the net with their
banking, why should they not in a so much less important field as political elections?
Still, while Estonia could have easily been the world leader in e-voting by introducing this as a regular
feature already for the local elections of 2002, probably genuine worries that technical problems would
not be solved by the Fall of that year, as well as the scepticism of individual members of parties
generally in favour of e-voting, all of them reasonable and appropriate, were among the reasons that
prevented such an outcome. Nonetheless, the resistance of the rural opposition party, which – likewise
reasonably and appropriately – feared that such a feature would increase the vote of its competitor
parties, and which therefore would have very rightly and properly fought against it in Parliament, at
least contributed significantly to the postponement of actual e-voting in Estonia until 2005.
However, many of the to-be-expected points of discourse (Will 2002 and Buchstein and Neymanns
2002 provide very good surveys) were hardly considered, and are missing from the Estonian discourse.
Without claiming completeness, I would want to single out the following five points, two general and
three Estonia-specific:
See, e.g.,; As all comments are anonymous, their level is
indeed exceedingly low, and they often do not connect with the subject at hand.
The Estonian e-voting law discourse
1. Are the effects of e-voting really beneficial for Democracy?
2. Will e-voting increase voter turnout?
3. How high are really the costs?
4. Are there possibly adverse effects of the e-voting provisions for joining the European Union?
5. Are there dangers of a law suit on the basis of the European Human Rights Convention?
4. and 5. came as a great surprise to many Estonian experts when mentioned; as regards 3., out of all
people, the “internet guru” of the Laar administration, Linnar Viik, cautioned that, compared to a
traditional one, “It'll cost ten times as much to have an e-election,”
but it did hardly enter the
More interesting for this paper, however, are the more fundamental questions of 1. and also of 2.,
because they are so often badly considered. Regarding these, results are not really ‘in’ yet, but
naturally, in such a key matter as Democracy, if there is reason for a cautionary approach, this should
be mentioned very clearly, and also discussed and taken into consideration before laws are passed.
Estonia is noticeable for its strong proclivities of anything e-related among its politico-economic elite,
as well as for an extremely low level of resistance against, and indeed discourse about, any
‘progressive’ developments that might have unwanted side-effects (biotechnology is another example;
see Weber 2001), which is perhaps why these matters were comparatively unaddressed. However,
probably not many CEE countries are doing much better in this respect. Thus, the following points
might serve as a general reminder:
4.1. Voter turnout
We have no good reason to think that e-voting will necessarily increase voter turnout. Rather, it seems
that those people who will vote on-line are highly e-literate people who are politically interested
already. (See Kersting and Baldersheim forthcoming) Darin Barney has noticed, correctly, that “recent
research indicates that network technologies tend to reinforce existing patterns of democratic behaviour
rather than mobilizing new actors and practices.” (2001, 264) But even if it were otherwise, one might
also consider theories such as the ‘Crispin Curve’ argument that overly high voter turnout is a sign of
problems, not of a healthy Democracy (1948, 160-165).
Laar’s continuous touting of e-voting as a possibility to increase voter turnout and (partially therefore)
develop democracy (see Laar 2002, 244-246 et passim) is therefore without any rational basis.
4.2. Digital gap
That the Digital Divide or Gap is a real threat that will in all likelihood widen various already-existing
gaps in society is, I think, clear for anyone who has studied the subject, and it has certainly been
Quoted in; on Viik, see
Wolfgang Drechsler
demonstrated for Estonia. (Kalkun and Kalvet 2002) And if Democracy is about representing people,
then Rahvaliit is right: The studies we have indicate that internet voting can substantially change the
result. (Cf., e.g., Tolbert and McNeal 2001 for the influence of Internet access (without e-voting) on
voter turnout) One of the most recent thorough studies we have, of a German county commissioner
election with model e-voting, shows that the result via e-voting would have brought another candidate
to power (the more left one, incidentally). (See Meuren 2001) It is somehow difficult to reconcile this
with the basic principles of participatory democracy.
4.3. e-matters and Democracy
But there is also a very general problem, which I will address only briefly, and by way of some quotes,
here (see Drechsler 2002 for a more extensive argument). Hubert Dreyfus’ excellent critique of ‘virtual
community’ and ‘electronic republic’ advocates, who suffer from a deep deficiency of thought on what
a polis is about and what are pure incidentals or mechanisms (2001, 103-106), should be mandatory
reading for all dealing with e-governance. As he says, “The Athenian agora is precisely the opposite of
the public sphere, where anonymous electronic kibitzers from all over the world, who risk nothing,
come together to announce and defend their opinions. As an extension to the deracinated public
sphere, the electronic agora is a grave danger to real political community. ... it is ... a nowhere place for
anonymous nowhere people.” (104)
On virtual communities, Darin Barney makes the similar general point: “Though they might feel like it,
the fact remains that computer networks are not real places, and while their virtuality might present
certain benefits for community formation, these same attributes compromise the rootedness of those
communities once they are established.” (2001, 214) “The network digital computer is often presented
to contemporary individuals as the final technology of their ultimate self-creation ... in so far as they
reduce the world – human beings included – to a standing-reserve of bits, networks culminate the
distinctly modern technological conditions described by Martin Heidegger: a condition characterized
by rootlessness, calculation, and the denial of mystery.” (195) Barney cites a 1998 study from Calgary
in which “it was found that membership in network associations had ‘corrosive effects’ on civility:
‘Respondents who were most engaged online tended to be relatively disengaged with (and distrusting
of) the “real” community. It appears that these online associations could be damaging to civil society’”.
5. Conclusions
It is well known that cyberspace, information and communication technologies (ICT), the internet, the
web, network technology, whatever you call it, makes our lives better, easier, and safer; flattens
hierarchies and thus makes people more independent; fosters democracy; improves social capital and
the sense of community; allows for greater freedom for the individual person because of the possibility
of re-defining oneself again and again, and so on. This is the basis of the desirability of e-voting as
The Estonian e-voting law discourse
well as e-governance; unfortunately, as basic assumption of an automatism, it is also exactly as wrong
as it is well-known. Yet, it can hardly be doubted that, technology-driven as our time is, this is the
‘train into the future’. What the Estonian case shows, and why this is an excellent paradigmatic
benchmark for Central and Eastern Europe, is that one should consider the problems of e-voting
thoroughly before passing respective laws; and the discourse analysis has shown that one can simply
not rely on the assumption that a nice conversation among all stakeholders will happen. The
detachment of the discourse from scientific approaches and study results in just such a science- and
progress-charged field is particularly curious. All this presents a challenge precisely to social scientists
in the area to push for a higher and therefore more responsible level of discourse.
On the most basic level, “When societal consideration of a new technology is limited to identifying
technical problems and technical solutions, the general condition in which technology holds sway is
reinforced rather than challenged. This, by and large, has been the case with network technology.”
(Barney 2001, 233) Worse, it has become part of the general paradigm of today, and even modest
critics of the net easily appear as luddites. The most appropriate counter for this is to take a step back
and look at the issue from the perspective of what the human person can and should be, and then
consider what network technology generally, and e-voting specifically, does.
(Note: Pure web-based information is not reprinted here.)
Annus, Taavi (2001). Riigiõigus. Tallinn: Juura.
Buchstein, Hubertus and Harald Neymanns (Eds.) (2002). Online-Wahlen. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
Crispin, Edmund (1948). Buried for Pleasure. London: Victor Gollancz.
Drechsler, W. (2002). Review of Dreyfus 2001 and Barney 2001. Philosophy in Review / Comptes
Rendus Philosophiques 22 (2): 87-90.
Drechsler, W. and Ü. Madise (2002). “e-voting in Estonia.” Trames 6 (3): 234-244. Also forthcoming
in Kersting and Baldersheim.
Dreyfus, Hubert L. (2001). On the Internet. London – New York: Routledge.
IT Meedia (Tanel Tammet and Hannes Krosing) (2001). “E-valimised Eesti Vabariigis: võimaluste
analüüs.” Also at
Kalkun, Mari and Tarmo Kalvet (Eds.) (2002). Digital Divide In Estonia and How to Bridge It. Tallinn:
Emor and PRAXIS Centre for Policy Studies. E-book, downloadable from
Kersting, Norbert and Harald Baldersheim (Eds.) (forthcoming). Internet Voting. Present Forms and
Future Perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wolfgang Drechsler
Laar, Mart (2002). Das estnische Wirtschaftswunder. [Tallinn:] Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung.
Lipmaa, H. and O. Mürk (2001). “E-valimiste realiseerimisvõimaluste analüüs.” Analysis ordered by
the Estonian Ministry of Justice. Also at
Meuren, D. (2001). “Testfall Landratswahl.” Spiegel Online (17 September), at,1518,157659,00.html
“Miks oodata aastani 2003.” Editorial, Äripäev (8 Januar 2001); also at
Tolbert, C. and R. McNeal (2001). “Does the Internet increase Voter Participation in Elections?” Paper
presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San
Weber, A. (2001). “baltikummer. Das verkaufte Volk”, SZ Magazin (3 November); also at
Will, Martin (2002). Internetwahlen. Verfassungsrechtliche Möglichkeiten und Grenzen. Stuttgart etc.:
... As a result, we know that it is possible to implement such a sophisticated technology as Internet voting "without technical roadblocks" (Drechsler, 2006). However, the organizational angle of Internet voting implementation remains under-researched, despite some notable exceptions: research on the legal aspects of Internet voting (Braun, 2004;Driza Maurer, 2017Loncke & Dumortier, 2004), including the constitutionality of Internet voting (Madise & Vinkel, 2014;Solvak & Vassil, 2016); works on actors' perspectives about Internet voting (Drechsler, 2003;Goodman & Pyman, 2016;Goodman & Spicer, 2019); works on the implementation process (Drechsler & Madise, 2004;Madise & Maaten, 2010;Serdült et al., 2015;Wilks-Heeg, 2009); and works on comparative policy analysis of electronic voting (Mendez, 2010). The organizational angle of Internet voting implementation is important to study as problems in the process of Internet voting implementation can result in the loss of voters' trust in elections and a lower perception of legitimacy for the government overall. ...
... Estonia stands out from the small population of countries that have implemented Internet voting. For 15 years, Estonia has been seen as a unique case by academics and as a benchmark by practitioners (Drechsler, 2003;Springall et al., 2014;Ströbele et al., 2017). From the public administration perspective, Estonia also stands out because, unlike other countries that piloted Internet voting (such as Australia, Canada, or Switzerland), Estonia is not a federal country with a multilevel governance structure. ...
... In 2003, Drechsler (2003) raised the question "How high are really the costs?" of Internet voting implementation in Estonia, referring to anecdotal evidence from the implementing actors that "It'll cost ten times as much to have an e-election" (Drechsler, 2003, p. 7). Since then, the cost of Internet voting has only been vaguely defined. ...
Full-text available
Internet voting has pride of place among digitalization projects in the public sector. It is frequently portrayed as an exemplary digitalization project, a proof of development and a demonstration of modernity. For these reasons, Internet voting implementation is surrounded by high expectations of its positive impact on all involved actors. While the impact of Internet voting on voters is relatively well studied (with the research on voter turnout, voter convenience and the change in voters’ political preferences), the impact of Internet voting on the implementing actors lacks empirical research. The previous research only indicates that Internet voting may result in greater accuracy and efficiency of the electoral process by decreasing complexity and reducing the administrative burden of election administration, without providing empirical evidence to support these expectations. The absence of focus on election administration leads to a situation in which a difficult task of Internet voting implementation is taken for granted: election administration is expected to deliver Internet voting in such way that guarantees positive outcomes. In line with this, the research on Internet voting focuses on the technological angle but not on the organizational and administrative ones. Furthermore, the small number of countries that have implemented Internet voting makes empirical evidence scarce. Still, Internet voting implementation at times leads to big failures, that are not necessarily rooted in technology. These failures disenfranchise groups of voters and challenge the integrity and the legitimacy of the electoral process. Therefore, it may be beneficial for future trials to know how to assess whether Internet voting implementation results in benefits to election administration. Thus, this thesis aims to reveal how Internet voting can be implemented to direct the impact of Internet voting towards a blessing for election administration rather than a curse. Therefore, the thesis poses two research questions: 1. How do election administrators and other actors implement Internet voting? 2. How do the choices made during the implementation of Internet voting affect election administration? Based on six peer-reviewed research publications, this thesis provides answers to these research questions. The theoretical foundation of this thesis builds on public administration theories, such as principal-agent theory and street-level bureaucracy theory, complemented with theories from accounting, business studies and engineering, thus providing for the interdisciplinarity of this research. Methodologically, these articles represent different research designs, ranging from the case study to design science to scenario research design. Among the methods of data collection, the articles utilize stakeholder interviews, on-site observations, document analysis and desk research. Among the methods of data analysis, the articles focus on process modelling, Activity-Based Costing, legal analysis, and software-supported qualitative and quantitative text analysis. The data collection for most of the papers also involved fieldwork. This thesis examines cases of Internet voting implementation at different maturity levelsin different contexts, including amid the pandemic and in a non-democratic 72 environment. All of this allowed the collection of rich evidence supporting or rejecting the established theories on the impact of digital technology on election administration. The findings of this thesis establish that the impact direction of Internet voting on election administration depends on particularities of implementation: the way Internet voting is implemented will define whether it leads to greater accuracy and accountability, a lower administrative burden and the probability of failure, or vice versa. This thesis disentangles what Internet voting means in organizational terms and, in particular, which different forms the implementation of Internet voting can take. It showcases how Internet voting can combine highly sophisticated technology in the front end and manual activities in the back end. Informed by the evidence, this thesis provides practical recommendations on the sequence of digitalization of election administration, highlighting the consequences of first introducing Internet voting while keeping the surrounding electoral processes manual. In respect to the implementing actors, increasingly, Internet voting is not delivered by an election administration. However, new actors come from both private and public sectors, in contrast to the expected proliferation of private actors. In all considered cases, the electoral authorities voluntarily delegated some of their election-related responsibilities to other actors due to the lack of capacity to perform those tasks themselves. The collected evidence demonstrates that in these cases, choices made during the implementation process resulted in increased complexity, costs of election delivery and the probability of failure, while not increasing accuracy and efficiency in the expected ways. Internet voting also did not have a spill-over effect on automating the surrounding manual processes. That being said, Internet voting can still increase accuracy, efficiency and the level of automation of the electoral process, but in less direct ways than expected. For the implementing actors, Internet voting increased the administrative burden and discretion of front-line public servants, thus increasing the possibility for human error and maladministration. In addition to the empirical evidence and theoretical contributions, this thesis introduces two tools which may be of particular importance for practitioners. Tool 1 helps in translating the complexity of electoral law into clear graphical instructions for poll workers: in particular, it shows how the dozens of articles of electoral law that are affected by the introduction of Internet voting can be distilled into one model. This tool can be applied to other domains of public administration that are experiencing digitalization. Tool 2 is a working methodology for calculating the administrative costs of different voting channels, with the opportunity for inter-channel comparison. This tool may have a broader application for comparing the costs of any digitalized public service with its analog version.
... The next step will be in the recruitment phase where the leaders in transition will suggest new figures to step up, not only new as an image and appearance but also as values and understandings for political actions. device and a personal identification number (Drechsler 2003;Drechsler 2006;Madise and Tarvi 2006;Drechsler and Madise 2004;Reiners 2011, 554-555). ...
... At the time the project was initiated in 2001, the coalition consisted of the parties Isamaaliit, Reformierakond and Mõõdukad, under leadership of Premier Laar (Isamaaliit). All three parties supported the project, partly also for different reasons, as reflected in the differences between their voter support groups (see Drechsler 2003;Drechsler 2006;Reiners 2011, 559-564). To be noted, however, is that the government changed several times before implementation of the project in 2005. ...
... Should a voter decide to do it this way, the last vote cast online becomes invalid. In this way, every voter could rid himself of interference, and the purchase of votes would become unattractive, since the last time a vote was cast would not be verifiable (Drechsler 2003). ...
Full-text available
The reality of our Europe is changing, as well as the sole nature of the leadership practices and styles. The old models are giving way to new concepts and theories, such as connected leadership, super leadership, spiritual visionary, political apostleship, etc. In the paper is made an attempt for revising some of the established notions of the political leadership in the light of the listed concepts. Along with that the scholars are witnessing a new phenomenon-mass movements without personalized leadership, such as “The Indignant”, “Occupy”, “Anonymous”, well known fact, which must be addressed properly. The analysis is looking for answers that can be used in the forthcoming major challenges in the 21st century. The author offers his own concept, this of the Political Apostleship as a way for leaders to reach values and visions beyond post-modernity.
... For 15 years, Estonia is seen as a unique case (Springall et al. 2014;Drechsler 2003;Ströbele, Leosk, and Trechsel 2017), or at least as a "beta-model" (Drechsler 2018) by academics and as a benchmark by practitioners. Alike other e-services, the political decision on Internet voting in Estonia has been accompanied by the expectations of cutting costs and administrative burden for public administration. ...
Full-text available
The introduction of new voting channels, voting technologies and other voting innovations are often thought to improve voter participation in elections and democracy. However, it frequently happens at the expense of administrators, who needs to deliver even more complex elections. This article traces how the introduction of a new voting channel, Internet voting, affects frontline administrators through a qualitative in-depth case study of the 2017 local elections in Estonia. Findings show that the local election administration plays a substantial role in delivering Internet voting, despite the centralized election hierarchy. The case shows little evidence to support the expectation that Internet voting decreases the administrative burden of local election officials. The article outlines the vulnerabilities in Internet voting administration, resulting from the complexity of delivering multi-channel elections, particularly the ones integrating Internet- and paper-based voting channels. The article makes important recommendations for improving the implementation of electronic voting and improving the quality of elections.
... . Estonia provides a diversity of voting channels, including internet voting which was implemented in 2005. Adopting internet voting raised a number of questions regarding impacts and the convenience of the system (Drechsler, 2004), which have been answered over the years. The only question that remains unanswered relates to the costs that internet voting involves for the Estonian budget (Krimmer et al., 2007;Krimmer & Volkamer, 2006;Xenakis & Macintosh, 2004b). . ...
Full-text available
New ways of voting in elections are being sought by electoral administrations worldwide who want to reverse declining voter turnouts without increasing electoral budgets. This paper presents a novel approach to cost accounting for multi-channel elections based on local elections in Estonia. By doing so, it addresses an important gap in the academic literature in this field. The authors confirm that internet voting was most cost-efficient voting channel offered to Estonian voters. IMPACT This paper presents a new, proven methodology for calculating the cost-efficiencies of various ways of voting. The authors provide rare data on electoral costs, including costs ranging from stationery to depreciation costs and provide a detailed cost breakdown of activities. The findings will have direct practical implications for electoral management bodies and policy-makers around the world.
... Against this background, the scientific relevance of the subject and the accompanying topic of e-voting are coming to the fore rapidly. Undoubtedly, Estonia is a pioneer in this respect (Drechsler 2003;Drechsler 2006;Maaten 2004, 83- The establishment of the Consortium Vote électronique in 2009, a cross-cantonal association that used a copy of the e-voting system used in the canton of Zürich, and further expansion of the system used in the canton of Geneva marked the greatest advances made by the project. As a result, 13 cantons participated in new trials in 2010. ...
Full-text available
The main research objective is to determine the impact of Europeanisation on the nature protection system in the countries of Southeast Europe. Europeanisation is presented in the research through legislative and institutional changes due to the adoption of the European ecological network – Natura 2000. Comparative analyses were made in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Data collection was primarily done through participant interviews in the establishment of Natura 2000 and secondary through all available relevant literature. After that, a policy analysis was carried out through a thesis and subthesis based on the main goal. The conclusion was presented as a confirmation of the main thesis that Europeanisation led to changes in Southeastern Europe’s nature protection system.
... Nevertheless, not all parties were or are in favour of Internet voting; there has always been opposition (Pammett and Goodman 2013). When the first drafts of the revised election acts were discussed in parliament, several points were raised (Drechsler 2003): for instance, issues of unconstitutionality, proneness to fraud or possible inequalities resulting from digital divides. ...
Full-text available
Goos and Korthagen present a detailed analysis of the three case studies “Green Primary”, “Voting in Estonia” and “Voting in Switzerland”, which all describe different practices of online ballots. Relevant contextual factors of the digital tools with regard to the key dimensions input legitimacy, throughput legitimacy and output legitimacy are assessed in order to better understand the role these digital tools can play in the political decision-making process. The case studies are based on desk research and interviews with organizers and researchers of the e-participation processes and analyse the digital tool, the participants, participatory process and the results of the digital tool. The analysis shows that online voting tends to be more inclusive and that the process as such requires different steps to strengthen security and privacy of the online ballot. Furthermore, no clear indicators for an often-claimed increase of turnout exist, and, in general, scaling up online elections to a larger framework than the rather restricted ones analysed in this chapter requires major efforts with regard to legal, technical and social aspects.
... Many countries successfully implemented the e-voting process. The Estonian case is the first case worldwide of a country that has actually passed overall e-voting laws (Drechsler, 2004). There are numerous applications developed for this purpose. ...
Full-text available
Research question: This paper discusses e-voting as an integral part of e-government in developing countries. E-voting enables automation of casting and counting votes. Motivation: The main goal was to investigate the readiness of both the public sector and citizens for switching from common “paper” voting method to electronic system-based voting. In order to improve democracy and trust in the election process (IDEA, 2011), the e-voting system should be reliable, accurate and secure (Mauw, Verschuren, & de Vink, 2007). The example that should be followed is the Estonian e-voting system (Drechsler, 2004). Idea: We proposed a comprehensive e-voting model that includes five components: e-voting services, IT infrastructure, participants’ registration, components integration and a system for counting and reporting. Security is the most important issue that should be overcome by using the cryptographic protocols. Reliability and availability of the e-voting system should not be neglected, and it should be able to save all verified casted votes. Data: In order to examine the readiness and awareness of e-voting potentials in a developing country, we conducted a survey that included 152 persons from three different groups: individuals, legal entities and e-government employees. Tools: In order to establish relationships among opinions of the three groups of respondents to the survey that was conducted, a comparative analysis was performed. For this purpose the questions were divided into four categories. Findings: As it was expected, the study results have showed that survey participants find security, lack of qualified staff and mistrust of the older generations towards new technologies as the crucial issues in developing and implementing the e-voting model. Based on the responses the cost reduction, ease of use and efficiency improvement are recognized as categories that could be realized by implementation of the e-voting system. Contribution: The results show the respondents’ opinion regarding the e-voting system introduction as a legitimate voting tool. It can reduce abuse, voting costs and manual errors.
... . Estonia provides a diversity of voting channels, including internet voting which was implemented in 2005. Adopting internet voting raised a number of questions regarding impacts and the convenience of the system (Drechsler, 2004), which have been answered over the years. The only question that remains unanswered relates to the costs that internet voting involves for the Estonian budget (Krimmer et al., 2007;Krimmer & Volkamer, 2006;Xenakis & Macintosh, 2004b). . ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
(The attached article refers to the publication stemming from this conference presentation) This article addresses the issue of electoral costs incurred by Electoral Management Bodies while running multi-channel elections. The focus is on complexity of organization of multichannel elections and cost variation between alternative voting channels. The applied theoretical framework is interdisciplinary and includes theories on election administration, business process reengineering and governmental cost accounting. The article develops the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) methodology which allows to assess the electoral cost in a more precise way when it has been done before and per ballot per every voting channel, making comparisons and cost-efficiency analysis possible. The methodology is tested on the case-study of the Estonian multi-channel elections taking place in 2017. The results show the significant cost variation between the voting channels with the most recent innovations in election organization such as advance voting at the county centers (‘supermarket voting’) being one of the most expensive per ballot, while the cost of Internet voting per ballot is the cheapest comparing to alternative channels.
Full-text available
O advento da era digital modificou a estrutura das relações sociais e políticas da sociedade humana, possibilitando a imediata difusão de ideias e caminhos a se percorrer, no que concerne à vida em sociedade. A comunicação instantânea que fragilizou governos e que tem o condão de reunir indivíduos com interesses semelhantes, também se revela como potencial ferramenta para expansão do próprio sistema democrático moderno, onde o cidadão goza de meios ativos de participação, num sistema integral de democracia, influenciando nas temáticas relevantes de ordem legislativa ou executiva, não como espectador político, cuja participação se dá em ciclos predefinidos, mas com atuação constante, vez que dispõe de ferramentas para tanto. A forma de governo onde encontramos uma potencialização da colaboração direta da população com os rumos de seu país e as novas faces da democracia são o escopo deste estudo.
Technical Report
Full-text available
It is still believed by many that the perceived democratic deficit of the European Union indicates the need for fostering a European public sphere as a space for debate across national public spheres. Moreover, there is a consensus that new modes of political communication and participation via the internet can play a role in that respect. Far-reaching expectations of fundamental reform of modern democracy through the application of online participatory tools are vanishing after two decades of e-democracy. However, if properly designed and implemented, e-participation has the potential to contribute to accountability and transparency, trans-nationalisation and politicisation of public debates, and the improvement of exchanges and interactions between EU decision-making and European citizens. A common critique on e-participation practices at EU level is that they are a successful civic instrument but not a convincing policy instrument. Many e-participative projects suffer from a lack of direct, or even indirect, political or policy impact, but seem to provide personal added value for participants and community building.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
Buried for Pleasure. London: Victor Gollancz
  • Edmund Crispin
Crispin, Edmund (1948). Buried for Pleasure. London: Victor Gollancz.